Stillbirth and residential proximity to extremely low frequency power transmission lines: a retrospective cohort study: Table 1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The relationship between electromagnetic field exposure and stillbirth has not been evaluated. We assessed associations between residential proximity to extremely low frequency power transmission lines and stillbirth across gestational age. METHODS: Data included singleton live births (N=514,826) and stillbirths (N=2033) for 1998-2007 in metropolitan areas of Québec, Canada. Using power transmission line maps, the distances between lines and residential six-digit postal codes (<25, 25-49.9, 50-74.9, 75-99.9, ≥ 100 m) were calculated. Generalised estimating equations were used to compute ORs and 95% CIs for distance and stillbirth, accounting for individual and area characteristics. Early preterm (< 28 weeks), late preterm (28-36 weeks) and term (≥ 37 weeks) stillbirths were examined relative to fetuses-at-risk. RESULTS: There was no association between distance and preterm stillbirth. The odds of term stillbirth for <25 m were greater compared to ≥ 100 m (OR 2.25, 95% CI 1.14 to 4.45), but no dose-response pattern was apparent. CONCLUSIONS: A graded dose-response trend between distance to lines and odds of stillbirth was not found, but the likelihood of term stillbirth was elevated for residences within 25 m of power transmission lines. Residential proximity to transmission lines is unlikely to be associated with stillbirth, but more research is needed to rule out a possible link.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".